High Court of Judicature at Madras Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Central Administrative Tribunal Order on Rejection of Compassionate Appointment. Employee's Son Found Ineligible as Dependent After Divorce of Widow and Delay in Filing Application.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Principal
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench dated 01.04.2025 passed in Contempt Petition No.CP/310/00081/2024 arising out of O.A.No.310/1544/2014. The petitioner, J. Ashok, is the son of a deceased employee of Southern Railways. The employee died on 05.10.2004. Before his death, his wife had obtained a decree of divorce from the Second Additional Principal Family Court in O.S.No.60 of 1997, dissolving the marriage. Consequently, the Railway Authorities determined that the divorced wife was not a dependent of the deceased employee, rendering her ineligible for family pension, and the scheme of compassionate appointment had no application. The petitioner, claiming as the son of the deceased, submitted an application for compassionate appointment on 07.01.2008, after a lapse of four years from the date of the employee's death. This application was rejected on 14.09.2010 on the ground that he was not declared a dependent. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a fresh application on 02.12.2013, which was also rejected vide proceedings dated 30.07.2014. The petitioner then approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, which passed the impugned order in the contempt petition. The High Court, in its order authored by Justice S.M. Subramaniam, narrated the above background. No further arguments, legal analysis, or final operative direction were detailed in the text provided; thus, the ultimate decision and reasoning remain unstated in the available excerpt. The writ petition challenged the Tribunal's order, but the extracted portion does not disclose whether the High Court granted or denied relief.

Issue of Consideration

W.P.NO.27347 OF 2025

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (07) 106

W.P.No.27347 of 2025

2026-07-15

S.M. Subramaniam, N. Senthilkumar

Petitioner: Mr. D. Panchatsaram; Respondents: Mr. K. Ramamoorthy, Senior Panel Counsel

J. Ashok

1. Shri R.N. Singh, Union of India Represented by The General Manager, Southern Railways; 2. Shri Hari Krishnan K, I.R.P.S., The Chief Personnel Officer; 3. Shri P. Balasundar, The Chief Workshop Manager

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal passed in a contempt petition

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the Tribunal's order dated 01.04.2025 in CP/310/00081/2024 arising from OA 310/1544/2014

Filing Reason

The Tribunal's order was adverse to the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment, prompting the challenge

Previous Decisions

Original Application OA 310/1544/2014 before the Central Administrative Tribunal; Contempt Petition CP/310/00081/2024 led to the impugned order dated 01.04.2025

Judgment Excerpts

The employee served in Southern Railway died on 05.10.2004. Even before the death of the deceased employee, his wife Smt.Devaki alias Devakiammal filed O.S.No.60 of 1997 and the Second Additional Principal Family Court granted a decree of divorce between the deceased Railway employee and his wife Smt.Devaki alias Devakiammal. However, the writ petitioner who is the son of the deceased employee, filed an application seeking compassionate appointment on 07.01.2008 after a lapse of four years from the date of death of the deceased employee. The said application was rejected on 14.09.2010 as he was not declared as dependent of the deceased employee.

Procedural History

The deceased railway employee died on 05.10.2004. Before his death, his wife obtained a divorce decree. The petitioner, the son, first applied for compassionate appointment on 07.01.2008, which was rejected on 14.09.2010. He applied again on 02.12.2013, which was rejected on 30.07.2014. He then filed O.A.No.310/1544/2014 before the Central Administrative Tribunal. Subsequently, a contempt petition (CP/310/00081/2024) was filed, and the Tribunal passed the impugned order on 01.04.2025. The present writ petition was filed to challenge that order.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of CRPF Constable for Disproportionate Punishment — Slapping and Tampering Certificate Not Grave Enough to Warrant Dismissal Under Section 12(1) of CRPF Act, 1949. Court Held That Punishment Must Be Proportionate...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Judicature at Madras Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Central Administrative Tribunal Order on Rejection of Compassionate Appointment. Employee's Son Found Ineligible as Dependent After Divorce of Widow and Delay in Filing Applicatio...